I submitted my veto. No offense to Patrick or Marin ... it just isn't remotely a fair trade and makes a 2-0 team unfairly stronger.

That's really not what a veto is for. It is not a stretch to think that Lance Moore could finish with more fantasy points scored than Daniel Thomas (who?) who has had a total of 1 quality game in his life.

Gimme a break.

Now if it were Adrian Peterson for Lance Moore, I'd be right in the front of the parade of people vetoing that one.

I do not see anyone else in this league going along with you on this one.

I submitted my veto. No offense to Patrick or Marin ... it just isn't remotely a fair trade and makes a 2-0 team unfairly stronger.

That's really not what a veto is for. It is not a stretch to think that Lance Moore could finish with more fantasy points scored than Daniel Thomas (who?) who has had a total of 1 quality game in his life.

Gimme a break.

Now if it were Adrian Peterson for Lance Moore, I'd be right in the front of the parade of people vetoing that one.

I do not see anyone else in this league going along with you on this one.

Actually, that is exactly what the veto is intended for. It is intended to prevent one owner from unfairly bolstering another team through a lopsided trade. I'm pretty sure that can apply to trades involving someone other than the #1 overall player, Matt. Value is based on a player's potential going forward, not the sum of his historical performances. Why is Cam Newton (who?) in starting lineups this week with only two games under his belt? Is it based on his many years of experience or the last two games?

Besides, A. Peterson had 25 carries for 120 yards last week againstly lowly Tampa. D. Thomas had 18 carries for 107 yards against the Texans who are allowing just 10pts per game. They were basically the only runners for their respective teams. Why are Earth would you be first in line to block a Peterson trade, but couldn't care less about Thomas? I don't get your rationale at all, but here is mine...

D. Thomas was drafted fairly early in all 6 of my leagues - Moore wasn't even drafted (and is still a FA) in all my leagues except this one. Thomas is a starting RB that probably won't even share time with Bush by the end of the season. He could easily finish in the top 10-20 of RBs, which is the toughest and most differentiating position in fantasy football. Contrast to Lance Moore, who may not even be the #1 or #2 WR in New Orleans AND he's coming off an injury. Do a search on any FFL website and try to find one that doesn't sound giddy about Thomas as the lead rusher in Miami.

There isn't one person in a million out there who thinks L. Moore is going to have more fantasy value than Daniel Thomas this year. I don't think even Maris believes that now that she knows the facts. Could he? Sure. Butt Favre could also unretire for the Vikings and win them a Super Bowl this year. Or using your example, L. Moore could outscore A. Peterson by the end of the season, couldn't he? If you want to use the "Well it could happen" rationale then we shouldn't even have a veto option because golly gee I guess you never know.

And I'm sure this will just floor you, but a few people have already gone along with me on this. I guess they have decided to be less publically vocal about it or maybe they have better things to do. That's their choice. This trade wouldn't stand in any of my other leagues, especially given the fact that the two owners are related. Like I said before, I don't think this was collusion, but I also think Maris might be more likely to make a trade with her dad than someone else and it really wasn't even fair for Patrick to make the offer as he clearly knows what he's doing.

So, I've made my case for a veto. If we don't have 3 other people willing to stand up and block it, then it's clearly a bigger deal for me than others and we can happily just move on. I'm fine with that - just wanted to explain my position.

I submitted my veto. No offense to Patrick or Marin ... it just isn't remotely a fair trade and makes a 2-0 team unfairly stronger.

That's really not what a veto is for. It is not a stretch to think that Lance Moore could finish with more fantasy points scored than Daniel Thomas (who?) who has had a total of 1 quality game in his life.

Gimme a break.

Now if it were Adrian Peterson for Lance Moore, I'd be right in the front of the parade of people vetoing that one.

I do not see anyone else in this league going along with you on this one.

Actually, that is exactly what the veto is intended for. It is intended to prevent one owner from unfairly bolstering another team through a lopsided trade. I'm pretty sure that can apply to trades involving someone other than the #1 overall player, Matt. Value is based on a player's potential going forward, not the sum of his historical performances. Why is Cam Newton (who?) in starting lineups this week with only two games under his belt? Is it based on his many years of experience or the last two games?

Besides, A. Peterson had 25 carries for 120 yards last week againstly lowly Tampa. D. Thomas had 18 carries for 107 yards against the Texans who are allowing just 10pts per game. They were basically the only runners for their respective teams. Why are Earth would you be first in line to block a Peterson trade, but couldn't care less about Thomas? I don't get your rationale at all, but here is mine...

D. Thomas was drafted fairly early in all 6 of my leagues - Moore wasn't even drafted (and is still a FA) in all my leagues except this one. Thomas is a starting RB that probably won't even share time with Bush by the end of the season. He could easily finish in the top 10-20 of RBs, which is the toughest and most differentiating position in fantasy football. Contrast to Lance Moore, who may not even be the #1 or #2 WR in New Orleans AND he's coming off an injury. Do a search on any FFL website and try to find one that doesn't sound giddy about Thomas as the lead rusher in Miami.

There isn't one person in a million out there who thinks L. Moore is going to have more fantasy value than Daniel Thomas this year. I don't think even Maris believes that now that she knows the facts. Could he? Sure. Butt Favre could also unretire for the Vikings and win them a Super Bowl this year. Or using your example, L. Moore could outscore A. Peterson by the end of the season, couldn't he? If you want to use the "Well it could happen" rationale then we shouldn't even have a veto option because golly gee I guess you never know.

And I'm sure this will just floor you, but a few people have already gone along with me on this. I guess they have decided to be less publically vocal about it or maybe they have better things to do. That's their choice. This trade wouldn't stand in any of my other leagues, especially given the fact that the two owners are related. Like I said before, I don't think this was collusion, but I also think Maris might be more likely to make a trade with her dad than someone else and it really wasn't even fair for Patrick to make the offer as he clearly knows what he's doing.

So, I've made my case for a veto. If we don't have 3 other people willing to stand up and block it, then it's clearly a bigger deal for me than others and we can happily just move on. I'm fine with that - just wanted to explain my position.

Jesus Justin, we've been doing this league for like 8 years and we've never had as much bickering as we did in the first 2 weeks of this one.

There's no VETO unless Brent feels the need, there's only a voting system.

So, vote against it, and then let it go. If the trade is really unfair, there will EASILY be 4 people who agree with you enough to vote it down.

And once you vote, the vote IS registered, even if it still lets you push the button later.

Thomas was a 6th rounder, Moore an 8th rounder. One is a good receiver on an excellent offense, the other is a time-sharing rookie on a bad team. Hardly the cheating / unfairness scenario you keep alluding to. This has turned into a whole lot of whining over very little. Vote, and then move on.

Besides, A. Peterson had 25 carries for 120 yards last week againstly lowly Tampa. D. Thomas had 18 carries for 107 yards against the Texans who are allowing just 10pts per game. They were basically the only runners for their respective teams. Why are Earth would you be first in line to block a Peterson trade, but couldn't care less about Thomas? I don't get your rationale at all, but here is mine...

Weird that you left out Peterson's TWO TOUCHDOWNS, Thomas' fumble, and the fact that Reggie Bush's gets carries in Miami while no one is touching Peterson's workload unless he rips an MCL when you made that comparison.

You two do understand the difference between a forum and a blog, right? Last I checked, this was a forum intended for discussion, not "Matt and Rob's Blog" where no one gets to voice their independent thoughts. This will shock you, but people CAN converse back and forth with differing opinions without someone feeling the need to label it a fit or bickering because they can't handle a thought that doesn't match their own. I know you have this ridiculous expectation that you should get to say what you want and everyone should fall in line, but it just doesn't work like that here. You can also stop exaggerating issues and start telling the truth if you want to publicly debate things.

Let's start with Matt first, since he's more fun than Rob. Matt, I'm sure you would oppose me regardless of my stand on anything these days. For those that don't know, Matt is upset that I offered to sell him my Archangel Marvel U figure for $30. I paid $8 for it ages ago and now it goes for $40 or more on Ebay. I honestly thought I was helping him out, but he took offense and now takes to trolling through my threads to bad mouth me and call me a scalper whenever he can, including in the smack talk on our Yahoo Fantasy Football site. Now THAT is throwing a fit. I'm tempted to just sell you the figure for $8 if you'll agree to just stop whining about it for 5 minutes. That's clearly what this is really about for you and its obvious from your post. I tried being civil about it for as long as I could, but you just don't stop. Go try to spin it however you like, you're a 12 year old girl having a hissy because you can't get your doll for $8.

And yes, I did lobby to have my trade deadline sped up after asking anyone if they had opposition to the trade. It was a unique circumstance given the timing of the draft, the Thursday night game, the fact that I couldn't get into the draft room, so I made my case. And when we decided not to do it, I kindly shut up about it and went on my merry way, just like I said I would.

I'm sorry that you were raised not to ask questions. I personally don't have an issue with someone making their case about anything. Just like my offer for the figure, you can agree or disagree - you can like it or leave it. What you probably shouldn't do is be a big baby about it and get down on someone every chance you get just because you disagree with them. I rarely agree with Rob, but I respect his right to an opinion no matter how much it differs from mine.

And speaking of Rob, I've gone on much too long without getting back to you. I'm using "veto" interchangably with "vote against" because it's shorter to type and my posts are already too long. I guess that confused you. Feel free to interpret each "Veto" as "vote against" if it makes you less crabby. You can do the same for others who also used veto, since that word obviously upsets you.

Let's set a few other things straight. First, YOU were the one that brought the discussion here, not me. I posted a line about it on yahoosports and suddenly you're talking with Maris and making multiple posts about it here. If you don't want people to discuss it, don't post about it. If you do post about it, don't be so pissy that someone comments on it. That's kind of what happens in a forum. Kindly accept that and stop labeling every voice of opposition as "whining." There's a clear difference between supporting your opinion and complaining about not getting your way, and I know you're grown up enough to get that.

And PLEASE don't make up **** about what I said. I have had plenty of conversations with Patrick on the side and I know he's a good guy. I have clearly clearly clearly stated multiple times that I don't think there was collusion...now you're saying I am accusing him of cheating? Really Rob? Let's be a little more honest about the stats as well. Bush had 3 carries, Thomas had 18 last week. Peterson had 25 and Tobey had 2 carries. If Thomas is a time share, then Peterson is too. And so are Mendenhall, and Turner, and every other back who had someone else run more than twice last Sunday. And I like how Thomas plays on a bad 0-2 team, but Peterson is clearly on a good 0-2 team. Get real. Yes, Peterson had 2 TD's, but it isn't like Thomas is getting pulled for Bush at the goalline. I am OBVIOUSLY not saying Peterson and Thomas are equals - I was trying to understand why, when there are many similarities, Matt would be front and center opposing an AP trade, but not a Thomas trade. But I guess we covered Matt's insecurities above.

I'll throw in one last note that you're clearly biased on this. We always disagree in the pit, so really no surprise that you feel the need to carry that to other subjects I guess. It's not like this is the first time you've done that. It's also very clear that your relationship with Maris and Patrick has zero influence on your opinion.

I guess I'll have to just keep repeating myself until the words can pas through your thick heads...

Quote

So, I've made my case for a veto. If we don't have 3 other people willing to stand up and block it, then it's clearly a bigger deal for me than others and we can happily just move on. I'm fine with that - just wanted to explain my position.

I'll throw in one last note that you're clearly biased on this. We always disagree in the pit, so really no surprise that you feel the need to carry that to other subjects I guess. It's not like this is the first time you've done that. It's also very clear that your relationship with Maris and Patrick has zero influence on your opinion.

I don't think I'm going to go into the point-for-point thing since we've basically covered it, but I am going to address this one. The only problem with this theory of yours is that it's a really really bad one... You should have noticed by now that the guy I've argued and disagreed politically with more than anyone else over the last 8 or so years here (and even before that at Rebelscum.) and I agree that you're full of it on this issue. You can also ask the rest of the righties how many of them I've let politics "carry over" into other forums. I think the answer would be none. I get along just fine with people here. The political thing stays in there, and I think I've been good about that.

I just happen to think that your incessant crying over this non-issue is ridiculous, so I said as much.

If you don't want people to discuss it, don't post about it. If you do post about it, don't be so pissy that someone comments on it.

Nonsense. I'm discussing it, just like you are - and my point of view is that there's nothing to whine about concerning that trade, that there is a mechanism in place for calmly voting on it, and that you're making an ass of yourself. Conclude what you will, but that's what's going on (and it's not the first time).

Now Dressel... I would like to know what secret relationship you've struck up with Marin and Patrick that has similarly biased you.

Can you please call out the incessant crying, whining, and ass-of-making? You're "discussing it just like I am," but you need to call my part of the discussion "whining" and "crying" because...why? Does it make you feel more justified belittling the opinion of someone else calling it crying or whining? Vintage Rob - when you run out of counterpoints, you start demeaning the other person and tell them they're being an ass about it.

Guess I need to post this yet again since you keep missing it...

Quote

So, I've made my case for a veto. If we don't have 3 other people willing to stand up and block it, then it's clearly a bigger deal for me than others and we can happily just move on. I'm fine with that - just wanted to explain my position.

You can find more of my "whining and crying" on the FFL site, where earlier today I deliberately posted Patrick's point of view for others to read and make up their own mind.

Honestly, if it's such a non-issue, why did you bring it up in this thread and why do you continue to quote me and post about it? I posted my response because I want to make other owners aware of an issue that matters to me. If it doesn't matter to you, then why are you wasting your time with it?